Jason Coyne

Iowa Porkbusting Efforts - A Scorecard of Iowa Pork and Congressional Earmarks

Pork (also known as congressional earmarks) is special projects granted money from congress to promote certain causes. Sometimes earmarks are a good thing, and the right thing to do. But more often than not, earmarks are pure pork - money transferred from the US taxpayers, to small groups or corporations. Sometimes these transfers are to help generate jobs in the state, or draw tourism. Even in these cases, should the entire US be paying for the effort? And all too often the pork is nothing but a payback for campaign donations.

Normally pork is hard to pin down. The pork is hidden deep inside unrelated bills, or Congress can claim they did not vote for the pork, because they can hide behind group anonimity. But recently, thanks to Congressman Jeff Blake, we get an insight into how each Representative stands on pork. Blake proposed 19 ammendments to trim pork from bills, forcing each congressman to vote yes or no. A No vote means the pork is kept in the original bill, and a Yes vote means the pork is cut. These earmarks are valued at 34,759,000. Thirty Four Million Dollars.  It may be a drop in the bucket of the overall budget, but every penny we spend over budget, is a penny we are paying interest on, and our children, and our grandchildren.

Now as an aside, our government is a Federal government. Our congress does not represent the nation, they represent each individual state (or district), and should be looking out for the interests of their own constituents. It is right, and proper, that each representative advocate for that state, even when that position may not be good for the nation as  a whole. This will get taken care of, because all of the other members of congress do not have the same interests, and efforts that benefit only one state should get quickly voted down. That is also right and proper - So below, where Iowa's Representatives have voted on House Vote 190 - Dairy Education in Iowa - It is right for them to vote for this effort, even though it may be wrong for the nation as a whole. Its up to the other members of congress to not let this through.

In Iowa, the pork situation looks pretty grim, with the exception of Steve King from the 5th District. While many criticize King for his some of his views, on the issue of Pork, clearly he is a true fiscal conservative. King voted Yes (to cut the pork) on 17 of the 19 ammendments. He voted No (keep the pork) on the Iowa Dairy Education amendment (190), and abstained from voting on the amendment for Tourism Development in Kentuky (338). As stated above, the vote for Iowa was the correct thing for King to do as an Iowa rep, even if it isn't the right thing for the nation - the collective vote takes care of that. For all the other amendments, he voted yes, to cut the pork, on issues from growing tomatoes in Ohio, to creating a mall on Arthur Avenue. Last time I checked, malls didn't have problems keeping a balanced budget, but congress does. We don't need to be spending money on that!

Unfortunately, the club of Iowa Fiscal Conservatives only has one member. Our other representatives, Jim Nussle, Jim Leach, Leonard Boswell, and Tom Latham all like bacon a little too much.  As stated above, I give all of these reps a pass on the 190 vote for Iowa Dairy - that is doing their jobs.  But they went above and beyond the call of duty below and behind the call of duty on this issue.

Leonard Boswell voted to keep the pork on 19 out of 19 amendments. Yet he has the audacity to put a link on his website claiming my portion of the 8+ Trillion dollar national debt is 28,000. I am willing to pay my share, but where does he think that debt comes from?

Jim Nussle also kept the pork on 19 out of 19 amendments. Nussle's website includes him standing next to Iowa's Pork Queen Amber Appleton, so at least he is honest about his position on Pork.

Tom Latham, again 19 out of 19 on the wrong side of pork. Tom claims to support tax relief. Where does he think that money comes from?

Jim Leach has a slightly better (but by no means good) record, he voted to cut the pork 3 times out of 19. Leach did pick a good one to cut, $20,000,000 for a wood research facility. Leach also voted to cut funding for a Bronx arts center, and “Jonstown area regional industries“.

How does your rep stack up? Check out the Club for Growth, and read your reps record. Write your own blog entry. Call your congressman and let him know what you think!

 

Are Hybrids Really Green? - Part III

Reader Steve C thinks I missed the point in my previous posts on hybrids being green - Are Hybrids Green (Part I) and Are Hybrids Green (Part II).

While it's undeniable that hybrids use less fossil fuel to operate, the real question is how much extra fossil fuel the manufacturing of a hybrid and its components use?

I'm no scientist, but I continue to read some sources that say that when you consider the additional energy consumed in building battery systems and other high-tech components of a hybrid car (and the potential environmental issues with their proper disposal), hybrids may in fact be (at best) an energy "wash", meaning there is no net saving of anything over the long-run.

 

I never claimed that Hybrids were a net gain (today)... In my first post I specifically addressed this :

Advances in technology take time, and early generations are always inefficient. It was probably cheaper to own a horse than buy a Model T, 100 years ago. But not many people drive horses to work today. Someone has to be the spearhead, and since it doesn't cost me anything to take that role, I choose that destiny freely.

and again in my second post

In essence, the first generations of a new technology are ALWAYS inefficient, and more expensive than what they replace - but that doesn't mean they aren't worth pursuing. This went hand in hand with the horse argument, but I can think of lots of other examples, most of which have nothing to do with being green. IE The first electric lights probably cost more (and provided worse light) than the oil lamps or gas lights they replaced, but the were still the wave of the future.

I could certainly have been more explicit, but my intent was to refer to both the efficiency in terms of actual dollars, and in terms of energy cost (to which the solar cells example was more relevant). To reiterate - A hybrid is cheaper for me personally, right now (undisputable). I believe the hybrid is probably a wash for society, in terms of energy cost, and monetary cost. But I believe that equation will change in the future. Fiscal costs, and ecological costs will both drop in the future as the technology advances, and economies of scale kick in. Even if there was a net loss ecologically today, I would still argue that hybrids are a “green“ choice, because they are an investment in the future technology. If nobody buys until the future, then the market goes away, the investment is never made, and the more efficient inventions and refinements never come about.

Interestingly, if both of my assumptions on cost are true (its a benefit to me, and a wash to society as a whole), that does mean that somewhere in society, my gain is being subsidized. This is probably directly due to the tax credit, which effectively means US taxpayers are collectively investing in the technology. No different than any other transfer. However, this is not an open ended coercion of investment, the tax credits are being phased out as demand is rising enough, and prices are falling enough, to generate the investment without the subsidy.

Pickens also asked about break even solar cells. I think he is missing my point, which is not that Solar Cells are a viable large scale energy source, but that later generations are of technology are more efficient and cost effective than earlier generations. But to address his question, I did find this independant study : http://www.solarbus.org/documents/pvpayback.pdf One should always take studies with a grain of salt, since methodolgy and phrasing of the initial questions in the study can have a wide effect on the results. I am not a solar expect, and make no claims to the accuracy of the study, but it would place the burden of proof on Pickens to either disprove this study, or provide a counter-study.  In any case, I would think Pickens would easliy admin that even if solar cells are not currently break even, their efficiency has improved over time, and will continue to improve over time - which was the real purpose of my example.

Pickens also was specifically talking about Solar Cells in New Jersey. Of course, location will have a tremendous effect on the viability of any green eneregy source. Solar will work best near the equator. Hydro will only work near a river, etc.  Petroleum based energy has the same restriction really... having a coal fired power plant where there is no coal wouldn't make sense.

 

 

Are Hybrids Really Green? - Part II - Alternative Energy Sources

Reader J.Pickens replied to yesteday's post on Are Hybrids Really Green?, with some followup items for debate. I think I shall indulge him!

... the comment that solar cells being "just near the point of breakeven" has been claimed for at least the last thirty years. I'm sorry, but photovoltaic electric power generation just isn't the answer. I personally was a member of a team which produced the first thin film photovoltaic cells able to get greater than 10% energy conversion in large area cells. This was back in the mid '80's, and the cells haven't gotten much better since then. Thermodynamics and Quantum Mechanics are a bitch. Even if we were able to use 20% efficiency cells, and plaster them over all the available land in the sunny southwest, we still wouldn't produce as much electricity as the current nuclear power plants in the US. In addition, the energy used to produce, mount, and maintain the cells would not reach breakeven for many years, so you'd actually CONSUME all that power BEFORE you got any of it back.

And the "peak oil" comment is laughable. There are many times the amount of hydrocarbon fuels available in the ground in the US than has already been consumed. It is a matter of political will and cost per barrel to get at them.

Now, maybe we can talk about other "Green" pseudoenvironmentalist disasters, like the need for thousands of daily round trips by diesel fueled trucks to remove municipal garbage from population centers like New York City and deliver the refuse to places like Ohio and West Virginia. If this refuse were burned in incinerators to produce electricity, you would offset more in energy use in one day than all the windmill generators in operation in the US produce in one year.

My comment on solar panels was not meant to imply that solar panels would be a good choice for powering cars, or for massive implementation to power the US grid. As you pointed out, the surface area required would be huge. I do however think that solar cells on a small scale basis may be viable, for example reducing (or eliminating depending on where you live) a home's energy bill by using cells on the roof. 

The point was that the break even point in terms of energy required to produce a cell, vs the energy generated by that cell over its lifetime has just recently been met.  In essence, the first generations of a new technology are ALWAYS inefficient, and more expensive than what they replace - but that doesn't mean they aren't worth pursuing. This went hand in hand with the horse argument, but I can think of lots of other examples, most of which have nothing to do with being green. IE The first electric lights probably cost more (and provided worse light) than the oil lamps or gas lights they replaced, but the were still the wave of the future.

Your peak oil response is somewhat weak I think. Firstly, nobody knows how much oil is really out there. Clearly there is more oil out there, and areas that we haven't tapped yet like the Alaskan preserve, but there is good reason to think that the mideast (and other) supplies are declining, and they have good reason to over-estimate over there. But, for the sake of argument assume there is a significant amount  (centuries) of oil out there- you already gave the problem in your own response. Of course it is a matter of will power and cost per barrel. The point is that that cost per barrel might be more expensive than switching to a new source energy (not even counting the enviromental effects of burning petrol). Already we are at the point in terms of traditional oil costs where technologies like oil shale extraction, and conversion from coal to oil are starting to pick up momentum. It doesn't need to go much higher before battery power  (with the ultimate source being solar, nuclear, hydrogen, etc) becoming a viable alterative.

As for burning refuse - it is an interesting idea. Certainly there would be savings in terms of transporting the refuse, and you would also get some land reclaimation out of it; in addition to the energy created by the burn - but the enviromental impact might be huge. From a clean perspective burning refuse I would imagine is somewhere on par with burning coal, and even worse perhaps, because you would be burning plastics, dyes, chemicals of all sorts, vaporizing mercury in the air, etc. You could do some sorting to reduce this, but that sorting and seperating (particularly if you tried to break down items into smaller components to get the maximum extraction) would be a logistic nightmare, and significantly reduce the cost effectiveness.

My personal thought, unless some major breakthrough like cold fusion or zero point energy comes around, is that nuclear is the only viable option long term. New generation pebble reactors significantly reduce the danger of nuclear power, and nothing else is scaleable to the level of meeting current world demand long term, plus the additional load caused by adding billions of Chineese and Indians as power consumers. Hydro power is good, but it is only usable in a localized area, solar (at current and near term efficiencies) takes too much surface area, wind also takes a lot of surface area - and may do more ecological damage than good.

update 7/12/06 4:37 pm : CWilliams asked for some detail regarding the ecological impacts of Wind Power. I would suggest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power as a good source. In the “Arguments of Opponents” section, it lists out several problems with wind power. Primarily the ecological impacts of wind power deal with destruction of wildlife habitats due to the area required, and injury (often death) of birds, bats, and other flying animals near the turbines. In Scandanavia, the enviromentalists often protest AGAINST wind power...

update 7/13/06 2:14pm Part III of Are Hybrids Really Green

Are Hybrids Really Green - An Economic analysis of the real cost and benefits of owning a hybrid

Reader J. Pickens responded to my Toyota Camry Hybrid review with the following criticism :

Its really too bad that the net energy use by your new hybrid is actually HIGHER than it would be for the non-hybrid version of the Camry. This is due to the extra energy cost of the electric motors, wiring, and, especially, the nickel metal hydride batteries which are not present in the non-hybrid Camry. Add it up, you are getting around an extra 10 to 15mpg for around 150,000 miles of battery lifetime. So, the 25mpg Camry uses 150,000/25 = 6000 gallons of gasoline. The 38mpg Camry uses 150,000/38 = 3950 gallons. The difference is 2050 gallons. At $3 per gallon, that is around $6000. Try pricing out the batteries and motors, they cost far more than $6000. Why is that? Because of the energy cost of building them. Its a fun toy, but don't fool yourself into thinking you are being "Green". You are being a pseudoenvironmentalist dupe, in my opinion.

Pickens raises some common concerns when talking about hybrids, and they are largely valid. Here is my response:

There are two factors to consider, the cost to me, and the cost to society as a whole.

For me, clearly the hybrid is a win. I was going to spend $30k on a car no matter what, so the cost of the car up front is a wash. Granted, I probably would have “more car” for 30k in a non-hybrid, but each driver's personal utility/value from particular features is subjective. Personally, I get a lot of utility out of the gadget factor of a car (or many other things I own). I use fancy gadgety cell phones, gadgety computers, I am a gadget geek, and the hybrid is high on that metric. With a hybrid, your mileage may vary. (ha)  So my utility is the same, but my cost is less, I get the fuel savings outlined by Pickens above ($6000 by his estimation), plus I get the tax credits. $2,600 federal, plus $500 Iowa = $3100 in tax savings, for a grand total of $9,100 in savings over the life of the car. I think the gas savings will actually be higher, since as a benefit of switching from the Passat to the Camry, I get to switch from premium gas to regular.

For me (and I think for anyone) a $9000 savings on the life of a car more than gets to the break even point, especially when you take into acount the alternative. People looking at the Hybrid Camry are not going to pick an old beater, or a new Hyundai Accent for $10k. They are going to choose a Passat, or a regular camry, or a lexus, or an SUV, or something else that is also in the $25-30k range, and certainly more than the $20k that the car actually cost ($30k - 9,100 in lifetime savings). (I am of course ignoring costs which both cars would incur like oil changes, which are just a wash).

Clearly on a personal level, this is a win.

Now on to the tougher question, the cost/benefit to society. Here, the answer is murky. For a hybrid car, today, there is probably a cost to society. The tax credits are reducing tax revenue, which will either cause an increase in the defecit, or a reduction in government expenditure (likely the former, but if it was the latter, I might consider that a win, especially if the cuts came from pork (go porkbusters!)).  The reduction in fuel use is a benefit, and while my personal reduction is negligable, the aggregate reduction of all hybrid drivers probably does shift the demand curve over a bit. The increased cost of the batteries and electic motors results in a reduction of profit (but I am sure even the hybrid camry is still at least breaking even for them) for Toyota shareholders, but in exchange they are getting a lot of free publicity - I call that a wash since they pay many many millions for that same publicity throughout the year. In reality there might be no loss in profit to Toyota, since if they didn't make the hybrid Camry, I (and others) might well have bought a car from a different manufacturer. This would of course be just a redistribution of profit, and not an actual loss to society as a whole. It could have some interesting defecit impacts though, since I would have prefered to by a domestic over an import, but no equivilent domestic car is offered. Also the emissions of the hybrid are MUCH better than standard cars. EPA estimates the Camry Hybrid to have 80% less emissions than an equivilent non-hybrid.

So for the present time, the total cost or benefit is questionable, my guess it is either break even. But what about tommorow? Solar cells, another green favorite have been around for decades, and they are just now getting to the break even point on energy cost. Advances in technology take time, and early generations are always inefficient. It was probably cheaper to own a horse than buy a Model T, 100 years ago. But not many people drive horses to work today. Someone has to be the spearhead, and since it doesn't cost me anything to take that role, I choose that destiny freely.

Lets face it, the world is facing an energy crisis. Between peak oil, the industrialization of China and India (resulting in massive increases in demand for oil), turmoil in the middle east - both for the effects on oil supply, and on national sovereignty - clearly the US, and the world, are going to have to move away from an oil based economy. Hybrids are a step in that direction. Hybrids plus E85 (from sugar beets rather than corn in my opinion - even though I am from Iowa) are a second step. Full electric or hydrogen cars at some point in the future, maybe powered by a nuclear grid - who knows? But they need to work out the kinks in these systems. Having a car that is driven by an electric motor, regardless of where the electric motor is ultimately powered from, is a fundamental step to the future. We can change from gas to e85, to grid, as an incremental step later. But the first step is today, and for me...

I step into a Toyota Camry Hybrid. YMMV :)

update 7/11/06 9:16 am: I found this large entry talking about hybrid economics. It goes into quite a bit of math to come up with the numbers. It largely agrees with what I stated above, but comes out saying that hybrids are probably not a win (from a purely $ today) They do think that hybrids are the best ecological choice. I think they are ignoring the large effect of the tax credits, as well as comparing everything against an economy car, which I think is a false assumption - people are going to spend roughly the same on their car no matter what, the fuel efficiency is a bonus.

update 7/12/06 3:22 pm: J Pickens replied to this post, so I continued the thread of Are hybrids really green - Alternative Energy Sources

Review of King Tut (Tutankhamun) Exhibit in Chicago at the Field Museum- Underwhelming and misadvertised - Where is the death mask?

I have been a fan of Egypt since I was a kid. I taught myself (some) hieroglypics, went on excavations in the backyard, and even had plans to be mummified. So when I saw King Tut was back in the states, I had to go. My mom had taken me when I was very young, but unfortunately I don't remember it.

I tried to go on opening weekend, but it was sold out, so Natasha and I went back to the Field Museum this last weekend. This went sour pretty quickly. I brought my camera, and several lenses, along to be able to capture all of the great treasures. But all photography (even non flash) was prohibited. This was completely unadvertised, and was a big pain in the bottom, because I now had to lug around my giant camera bag, with no benefit! I dont know if this was due to some greedy need to want to sell books and pictures at the gift shop (likely) or because...

The place was packed... Even with time restricted tickets (only good for a 30 minute window) the place was very full. In order to see some of the items, you had to wait 5 or more minutes to work your way to the front of the crowd. The photography restriction is understandable in this situation, as it would take hours to let everyone get their unobstructed photos of the items (plus idiots using flash on 3000 year old paint), but it would have been nice to be warned in advance.

Then you get to the content. The exhibit was easily more than 70% not Tut artifacts. Lots of Amonhotep II , III, and various other royals (probably) related to Tut. That isn't to say that the items aren't interesting, and rare, and worth seeing - but the exhibit is clearly advertized as revolving around Tut.

In particular, Tut's golden mask is the centerpiece of all advertising, including posters all over the city, the internet site for the exhibit (www.kingtut.org), the admission tickets, etc. But THE MASK IS NOT ON EXHIBIT. I don't know if I can emphasize how dissapointing (and frankly fraudulent) I feel this is.  The single most iconic item related to Tut, and advertized everywhere, is not on display.  Also not on display were the golden chariots, thrones, etc.  There were really only 6 or 7 items actually from Tut's tomb, plus a large stella that refered to Tut from a temple.

In any case, I think the exhibit is worthy of a visit if you are a fan of Egypt, especially if you live near Chicago or one of the other venues, but be realistic about what you are about to see.

update Technically the show is not using false advertising, the mask that is used for all the ads is the “Canopic Coffinette of Tutankamun” This is a miniature coffin (about 16 inches long) that was used to store Tut's liver.

but the image is highly cropped to seem the same as the mask. The brochure does name the item correctly, but I think that 99% of all viewers would assume it is the mask. Interestingly, the coffinette is more ornate and more impressive (at the same level of detail) than the famous mask that everying thinks of, but the mask is of course much larger. See the images below for the actual item, how the item is presented, and compare that to the mask. I think its clear from the cropping that they are trying to evoke the mask. They could have cropped less tightly to make it obvious that wasn't the mask, but still give an impressive photo.

 

	The Cofinette (It is difficult to tell from this picture, but the coffintte is only about 16 inches long.)
	The Coffinette as cropped in the ads
	The mask everyone is expecting. You can tell the ad is the cofinnette, because the full mask does not include the crossed arms with the crook and flail

Toyota Camry Hyrbrid Review

update 6/11/8:32 am: Reader j.pickens questions the true benefits of a hybrid. Read my response here.

update 6/10/06 2:22 pm: Welcome Instapundit readers! (and others)

update 6/10/06 2:20 pm: I made another roadtrip, this time to Chicago, that revealed some additional insights : In the Chicago freeway system, the DVD navigation does use exit numbers in the audio guidance, but in my local Cedar Rapids area, I just get “stay right“ or “exit right” even though the exit number is displayed on the screen. I do not know why it isn't the same in both cases. Also, Chicago had an additional level of detail in the map, where I could zoom down and see a street level view. This is more than just the 150 foot view that shows street names, it was almost like playing an old atari video game, it was trying to draw the streets from above, including buildings. I do not have this option in Cedar Rapids.  Also, regarding the power of the hybrid engine - While I still say I feel the engine ealier I may have over emphasized this effect in my description below; further, the amount of “drag“ seems to be related to the current battery level. With a full battery, I do not feel the drag at all, but when it is low it is more noticable, because all the power needs to come from the combustion engine. Also, some of the difference is due to expectations from years of driving a normal car. I was driving through town yesterday in electric mode, with cruise control set at 40 mph. The car seems slower than it is, because you don't hear any sound, don't have any engine vibration, etc. This leads to a feeling of slowness, which is entirely subjective, since you are actually moving along at 40mph.

update : Made several corrections and clarifications based on feedback.

I picked up my new hybrid Camry on July 2nd, and have driven in for my work commute several times, plus a trip from Iowa City, to Madison, Wisconsin and back (~173 miles each way)

I am going to keep this review pretty empty of quantitative numbers like horsepower, and volts, etc. These numbers are available all over the web, and I won’t provide any value by repeating them here. This review focuses on my experience and thoughts while driving the Toyota Camry Hybrid.

Just to let you know where I am coming from, I upgraded from a 2002 Volkswagen Passat V6 GLX. The Passat is big, nicely appointed, and has lots of power, so I was a bit worried about the transition to the hybrid Camry. Also, I am an aggressive driver, I tend to drive ~80MPH on the freeway, and 40’s on the streets. I notice that I am being less aggressive in the Camry, which might have two reasons. 1) I’m trying to maximize my fuel efficiency, since its very easy to notice in the car, and its one of the reasons for buying the Hybrid Camry, and 2) the Camry does have less power than the Passat, and I am feeling my “push” more.  As I said I averaged around 80MPH in the Passat, but would often find my self daydreaming along in the 90s. I doubt that will happen in the Toyota Camry, because I definitely feel the engine earlier.

I had been looking at the hybrids for a while, in particular the Prius, but I needed more size and more luxury than the Prius provided. I put down my deposit for the Camry as soon as they were announced, and have been waiting (not so patiently) ever since.

After several delays (including repairing some cosmetic damage to the car while it was shipped from Japan :( ), I got my car on the 2nd. The hybrid Camry comes with quite a bit standard, that is optional on the non-hybrid Camry, plus quite a few options. However, in reality, there are only two hybrid builds available: the base model, and the loaded model. There are in between models out there, but they are much more rare. This can also vary by region, but if you want something other than base or loaded, be prepared to wait. The loaded model comes with leather, DVD navigation, and a sun/moon roof. I got the loaded model, in Barcelona Red, with tan leather interior.

Hybrid

Most of the features in the Toyota Camry Hybrid are available in some form in the other models of Camry, or in other non-Toyota cars, so quite a bit of this post applies to every new Camry, or even every new Toyota. But the hybrid drive is what makes this car special.

When you start the car (again, by pushing a button, not by turning a key) some lights turn on, but the car remains totally silent. Depending on the engine temperature (which is based on your climate, or how recently you drove the car) the engine may stay off completely; but usually the engine turns on automatically to start warming up the engine when you need its power later.  If the engine stays off, you can drive around in electric only (EV-Only) mode, until you run out of battery power, get up to 40MPH, or need additional power.  The “power” requirement is pretty low. For the way I drive, the engine turns on pulling out of any stop light, or parking lot, and even going up a modest incline. However, once you get up to speed (while staying below 40) you can engage EV mode by lifting your foot off the gas for a second. Also, going into cruise control will often put the car into EV.

Toyota’s marketing, and the general scuttlebutt claim that the Hybrid Camry (and the Prius and Highlander) are CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission). This is not actually true. In a true CVT, you have an effectively infinite number of gears, and you run at whichever one will give you maximum efficiency. For the Hybrid Synergy Drive that the Camry, Prius, and Highlander use, there is actually only one gear, regardless of your speed.   For details of how the HSD works, I recommend reading these articles : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Synergy_Drive  and http://www.ecrostech.com/prius/original/Understanding/ContinuouslyVariableTransmission.htm

The effect of this engine design is that the engine is always at the same gear, regardless of your speed, but that power can be directed to the battery or the wheels is different ratios depending on current needs. The Hybrid Camry drives like a CVT, in that there are no gear shifts as you apply power.

According to the quantitative reviews, the Hybrid Camry accelerates almost as quickly as the V6 Camry, and faster than the 4 cylinder model. It accelerates fine for my purposes, especially merging into traffic from a parking lot, or getting up to highway speeds, but I do notice some sluggishness accelerating from 40 to 60 MPG.  While I don’t feel that I am over-taxing the engine, I can definitely feel the push and hear the engine when getting up to 60-70MPH, but this may also be due to my aggressive driving habits.

Once up to speed, especially when using cruise control, the engine works much less to maintain speed. When accelerating, my fuel efficiency gauge often shows between 10-20 MPG, but then once I am at speed in the 60 MPH, the fuel efficiency will sit at 60MPG. The FE gauge only goes up to 60MPG, so it is possible that my actual efficiency is even higher.  I wish it had a digital gauge, or went up to 100 or something so you could have more information. When going up a hill, the Camry will drop down to around 30MPG, but then quickly climb up to 60 when flat or downhill.

In my Passat, my fuel efficiency was consistently around 22-24MPG for my commute (90% highway, at 80MPH). With the Camry I seem to be driving slightly slower (70-75) and my efficiency is 38. According to the efficiency database at http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/toyota-camryhybrid.html some people are consistently getting 40+ MPG, but they may have better driving habits than I. The average is right around 38/39, which matches right up with the EPA estimates. This is unusual, as the EPA usually overestimates mileage by quite a bit.

(update copied from above)

While I still say I feel the engine ealier I may have over emphasized this effect in my description; further, the amount of “drag“ seems to be related to the current battery level. With a full battery, I do not feel the drag at all, but when it is low it is more noticable, because all the power needs to come from the combustion engine. Also, some of the difference is due to expectations from years of driving a normal car. I was driving through town yesterday in electric mode, with cruise control set at 40 mph. The car seems slower than it is, because you don't hear any sound, don't have any engine vibration, etc. This leads to a feeling of slowness, which is entirely subjective, since you are actually moving along at 40mph.

Gadget Factor

The gadget factor of this car is through the roof.  Everything starts with the smart key system. You walk out of your house's front door, and put the keys into your pocket. Without unlocking the car (either with a key, or with a remote) just walk up to the car and pull on the door handle. If the key fob is close enough to the car (real close, within a few feet) the door unlocks. By default, this only unlocks the drivers door (or the passenger's door if you are on that side, the key distance is really accurate!) but you can reprogram the car to unlock both sides, or all four doors as well (I have not done this personally, but its what I've read elsewhere) You get into the car, and leave the keys in your pocket. Hit the “start“ button, and the car turns on. At this point, the car is ready to drive, even though the engine may not be on! The dash is very modern, with nice LED backlit readouts and displays.  In the location where the tachometer would normally be, there is a Fuel Efficiency gauge that goes from 0 to 60MPG, plus an additional area for electric-only.

I mentioned the key fob, my hybrid Toyota Camry came with two fobs, and no keys! The fob looks just like a normal remote control you might get with any car. There is a very small, hidden key inside the fob, that you can extract. But there are no keyholes on the car doors, or inside the car by the ignition, so I have no idea what they are for. It took about a week to get into the habit of not getting my keys out as I approach my Camry, only to put them back in my pocket when I remembered I don’t need them to start the car.  The downside of this feature is that its easy to walk out of the car while leaving it running, since there are no keys to remove, and the engine is often totally silent (off) when you are not in motion.  I have been told that there are keyholes in the car in the drivers door, for the trunk, and for the glove box, but I haven't seen them yet.

If you have the navigation option, the multi function display shows lots of information about fuel efficiency, and how the battery, electric motor, engine, and wheels are interacting.  Non-navigation models do not have this display. Either way, there is a small LCD screen on the dash that shows some of this information, as well as the odometer, outside temperature, trip computer, etc.

DVD Navigation

The gadget factor continues with the center console of the car, which contains the DVD navigation system, the stereo and CD system, and the climate control area. My previous car did not have built in navigation, but I did have the Garmin Streetpilot III, which at the time of purchase was the top of the line stand alone navigation system. This was the first navigation system widely available that included voice guidance, and turn by turn directions. The Toyota system (actually made by Denso, using NavTech maps) is significantly better than my older Garmin system. The DVD claims total coverage of the continental US, and Canada, with detailed coverage around most population centers. So far, I have not found any areas that did not provide street level coverage, including some very small towns (~5k population) in rural Wisconsin.  The maps seem to be fairly up to date, so far I have only come across two roads which were not on the system, both of which are very recent (within the last year) highways which were moved over about 1/2 mile from their original location. On the other hand, my friend just moved into a new subdivision, where his is the only house on the block, and his next door neighbor is a cornfield, and his streets were there. (I kid you not, he lives on the corner of Abbey Road and Penny Lane!).  The system is very good at finding routes, it even picked my families secret, shortcut route to our lake house, that we have been passing down from generation to generation, using all back roads - over the very easy 3 turn all highway route that takes quite a bit longer.

 One criticism I had of my older navigation system, was the way that it dealt with highway exists. Most often, highway exists are on the right side of the road, even if you eventually end up going to the left (via an under/overpass). My old system would say turn left (the direction of the highway), even when you actually had to turn right (the direction of the exit). The Toyota Camry system handles this correctly , but it still uses “turn right“ or “keep right“ for the exits, when I would prefer (“exit 242 to Highway 380 East“) , which is completely unambiguous, and matches up with the signs that you would be looking at.  I would even settle for “exit right“, which makes sense, but “keep right“ is confusing a bit; especially when there is a clear exit, vs. just a lane split.

The voice guidance is very clear, in a nice natural sounding female voice. You can also have the voice guidance in French or Spanish as well. (The French actually sounds more natural than the English to me, but that may be due to my recognizing subtleties of English better). All the menus for the entire car get translated as well.

 In addition to voice guidance, the Camry supports voice activation. You push a button on the steering wheel, and then can give commands. Commands apply to all parts of the car (including navigation, phone, stereo, climate, etc). To use the navigation by voice you say “Address“. Then you say each part of the address, punctuated by additional pushes of the wheel button. So for example you do:

Button. “Address“, button, “Wisconsin“, button, “Madison“, button, “Main Street“, button, “one-two-one-two“

The system confirms and repeats each section of the address, and if you mess up a section, you can re-do it. This part of the system is a little flakey, and you have to speak very clearly. The system would continually give me “Sarona“ when I was saying “Verona“, and it took several attempts. 

By default the system gives assistance, which makes the process much longer, and requires additional button pushes on the wheel. I turned this off as soon as I figured out how. (Its in the Info->Setup menu)

The navigation screen supports several display modes, including a very useful split screen mode, where each side of the split can display the local map, but at different zoom levels, so you can keep the 2 view on the left, and the 150 foot view on the right.   You can do full screen map, as well as split screen with information on the right, such as upcoming exits (along with which restaurants and gas are at that exit). The navigation does not offer a 3d mode. I think the 3d mode is mainly a novelty, but if you like that type of display, you may miss it.

For safety, the system turns off quite a bit of the screen input when the car is in motion. This is true even if there is an additional passenger in the seat that could be doing the data entry. However, the voice activation remains available at all times.

There is an override back door to the system that allows data entry while in motion. I will tell this secret code here, but recommend it only be used by a passenger, and not by the driver. You use this code at your own risk, and neither I, Toyota, and probably not your insurance carrier will be responsible for any accidents you cause while not paying attention in this mode.

To Override : Push the menu button, push the volume icon in the middle the screen, push the volume icon in the top left corner of the screen, push the bottom left corner (with no icon), push the volume icon in the top left corner of the screen (again), push the botton left corner (with no icon) (again). At this point a new menu appears. Some cool stuff here like the GPS satellite data. I would not mess with stuff though, because you might screw up your car. One of the buttons says “override“ push and hold this button for 5 seconds, then release. The button will stay blue. Then push the back button.

At this point, you can use all input functions while in motion. This code can also be used while in motion. You must re-enter the code every time you turn your car on, but it can be done in 6-7 seconds.

Be careful, if you enter the hidden menu, and then something comes on the screen, you can get locked from the screen, have to pull over, and restart the car. This happened to me when I put the radio into “scan“ mode, then went into the menu and could not get out of the menu or stop scanning, until I restarted.

One thing I found that I did not like about the navigation, is that cities and points of interest are split into regions of the country, presumably to make searches go faster. You have to manually choose the region you are searching for (which gets saved) rather than using your current region by default. This is particularly lame if you live on the edge of a region like I do, where Iowa is in one region, but Wisconsin and Illinois are in the next one over, and I have to keep switching my region as I am looking for my destination.

(update copied from above)

In the Chicago freeway system, the DVD navigation does use exit numbers in the audio guidance, but in my local Cedar Rapids area, I just get “stay right“ or “exit right” even though the exit number is displayed on the screen. I do not know why it isn't the same in both cases. Also, Chicago had an additional level of detail in the map, where I could zoom down and see a street level view. This is more than just the 150 foot view that shows street names, it was almost like playing an old atari video game, it was trying to draw the streets from above, including buildings. I do not have this option in Cedar Rapids. 

Phone

The Toyota Camry supports Bluetooth integration with your cell phone. I believe this is available even in the base model. I use a rather obscure phone, the HTC Universal (also known as iMate JasJar, or Dopod 9000). The Bluetooth integration works great.  You just pair the phone, and then everything else is automatic. You can dial from the car 4 ways: voice dial via number (“eight zero zero, five five five one two one two”) voice dial via name “Mom”, phonebook on the navigation display,  or via the keypad on the navigation display. The car supports phone book transfer via vCard, but only some phones support vCard sending, and mine is not one of them, so I can’t tell you how that works.  You can also dial from your phone either manually or through a phonebook, and the car automatically picks up the call.

 The phone goes through the Camry speaker system, and is very clear to hear, even at high speed. I have the Motorola Bluetooth speakerphone that I used in my Passat, and this is MUCH easier to hear. The microphone pickup seems very good, nobody has complained about me being on a speakerphone or carphone, and they used to do so regularly with the Motorola. I even asked a co-worker if they could tell I was in the car when they called me, and they said no, just sounded like a normal cell phone. I did open up the sunroof once while talking to my mom, and she said it sounded like I got into an accident, so closing windows, sunroof, and perhaps slowing down may be needed to maximize sound quality.

Stereo

The stereo is great, although I am not a huge audiophile, and I don’t have a tricked out audio system in any of my cars. All stereo adjustments are made via the computer display, including adjusting bass/mid/treble, and 4 way balance (left/right/front/back).

The tuner has a dedicated seek knob, dedicated power/volume, and a scan button on the dash, as well as power, volume and seek on the steering wheel. The steering wheel seek only goes between your programmed stations, I would have preferred an option to seek across all channels. The channel display appears in the multi function display (with the nav), and is hidden unless you are changing channels or volume. When displaying the channel, the radio will automatically pick up and display the station call sign, and genre, if the station is transmitting it. (In my area, about 25% of the stations are sending it) This also enables a “genre scan” from the display, which will do a normal station scan, but discard any stations that aren’t from your specified genre.

The Camry includes an in dash CD changer, as well as the DVD player for the Navigation. The Navigation model has a 4 disk changer, the non-nav model has a 6 disk changer. The disk slots are hidden behind the navigation display, which pops out when you press the load button. This is very “James Bond” and produces lots of “oohs and aahs”. You feed disks one at a time into the slot.  You can take out and replace the navigation DVD, but if you put in a movie, it will not play. There are rumors of a backdoor that will enable DVD movie playback, but I do not know it, or know if it is real.

Body

The 2007 Camry looks very nice. It has a sportier, much more luxurious look than previous Camrys. Around here, it seems like ever 3rd car I pass is a Corolla or Camry, and the older models look very economy. The new one does not suffer from this at all. My only objection to the body styling is the nose. The nose is a bit blunt for my tastes, somewhat like a snub-nosed revolver, but it seems like this look is in vogue right now, and you may like it more than I do. Pictures are available throughout the web, so I won't post here, unless someone really wants to see my particular car. 

Trunk

The other negative for the hybrid Camry body is the trunk. Both the regular car battery and the hybrid battery are in the trunk. This leads to significantly reduced trunk space. The official numbers are 10.6 cubic feet for the hybrid trunk, vs 15 cubic feet for the trunk of the standard Camry.  For my trip to Wisconsin, I was able to fit one midsized roller bag, one large duffel, my large camera bag (gym bag sized), and a backpack. There was space for some smaller items (such as a purse or additional backpack) but no more luggage. The roller bag fit widthwise (with the long side of the bag aligned with the rear end (X axis)). It almost fit lengthwise (aligned with the side of the car (Z Axis)) and may have fit with some squishing, but I didn't want to risk messing up the car on the first week. Your bag may fit better, but for a full-sized roller bag, I think you will be stuck with the wide orientation or the back seat. I did notice the trunk is fairly deep (Y Axis) and you can stack more than item on top of each other. The trunk also has a pass-through into the rear seat, but this is largely blocked by the hybrid battery. The actual pass-through is quite small, and would only be useful for some skis or 2x4s or something.  Another problem with the pass-through is that it is above the hybrid battery, which is in the lower rear of the trunk. I would be wary of putting any heavy items in that location.  The Toyota Prius has the hybrid battery in a more form fitting shape, which does not have as a noticeable impact on carrying space. I hope this gets improved in future versions of the Camry.  If your primary concern is carrying things, vs. carrying people, you may be better off with the Prius (or the Highlander, or Escape if you get into SUV territory) One reader said a good idea for cerrying luggage if you are only using the front seats, is to use the fold down seats. Even though you can't use the passthrough for luggage, you can save your cloth/leather by using the back of the seats.

Summary

I am very happy with the new car, but there are a few areas that need some improvement for future models.  I hope this review helps you make a decision!